Grand Junction, CO (October 22, 2010) – With free legal assistance from the National Right to Work Foundation, a bus driver who was fired because his wife opposed unionization has filed federal unfair labor practice charges against First Student, Inc. and International Brotherhood of Teamsters Local 455 union officials.

Clark Kelley, a mechanic employed by First Student for over 20 years, is married to Traci Kelley, a former First Student bus driver. Mrs. Kelley vocally opposed a Teamsters organizing campaign in late 2009, and subsequently filed unfair labor practice charges against Teamster officials for attempting to force her to join the union. Although Clark Kelley is also employed by First Student, he did not work in the same bargaining unit and was not a union member.

A month after she filed unfair labor practice charges, Traci Kelley and her husband were suspended from their jobs. On April 21, 2010 Clark Kelley was fired from First Student in retaliation for his wife’s refusal to join the Teamsters union and for the unfair labor practice charges she filed.

Although First Student claims that he was terminated for faulty maintenance records, Clark Kelley believes that this was a pretext for retaliation against his wife. Moreover, several other First Student employees believe that Kelley was terminated “to get to” his wife for opposing the Teamsters’ presence.

While Colorado workers can be forced to pay certain union dues as a condition of employment, employees cannot be disciplined for opposing unionization or refusing to join a union. Employers are also prohibited from using disciplinary action to discourage other independent-minded workers from speaking out against union officials.

Clark Kelley’s charges will now be investigated by the National Labor Relations Board.

“In a heavy-handed attempt to quash employee dissent, Teamster bosses had Clark Kelley fired because his wife took a stand against workplace intimidation,” said Patrick Semmens, Legal Information Director for the National Right to Work Foundation. “Workers shouldn’t be punished for speaking out on the job, and we hope the National Labor Relations Board will intervene promptly to ensure company and union officials are held accountable for their thuggish tactics.”

Bus Drivers Slam the Brakes on Teamster Union Boss Intimidation and Threats

Teamster bosses bullying independent-minded workers to sign self-disparaging letter just to exercise their constitutional rights

Long Island, NY (October 8, 2010) – Two Syosset-based bus drivers have filed federal charges against a local Teamster union for refusing to recognize, without condition, their constitutional right to refrain from formal union membership and instead are intimidating independent-minded workers who exercise that right.

With free legal assistance from the National Right to Work Foundation, the two Acme Bus Corp. drivers filed the charges late last week with the National Labor Relations Board (NLRB) regional office in Brooklyn.

Teamsters Local Union 1205 officials are failing to acknowledge without condition the workers’ rights to refrain from formal, full dues-paying union membership established under Foundation-won precedent in the Supreme Court case Communication Workers v. Beck. Instead, Teamster Local 1205 union bosses are forcing nonmember employees to sign a self-disparaging letter characterizing themselves as “dues complainers.”

Read the entire release here.

Long Island, NY (October 8, 2010) – Two Syosset-based bus drivers have filed federal charges against a local Teamster union for refusing to recognize, without condition, their constitutional right to refrain from formal union membership and instead are intimidating independent-minded workers who exercise that right.

With free legal assistance from the National Right to Work Foundation, the two Acme Bus Corp. drivers filed the charges late last week with the National Labor Relations Board (NLRB) regional office in Brooklyn.

Teamsters Local Union 1205 officials are failing to acknowledge without condition the workers’ rights to refrain from formal, full dues-paying union membership established under Foundation-won precedent in the Supreme Court case Communication Workers v. Beck. Instead, Teamster Local 1205 union bosses are forcing nonmember employees to sign a self-disparaging letter characterizing themselves as “dues complainers.”

In Beck, the Supreme Court held that workers who refrain from formal union membership – while still forced to pay certain union fees as a condition of employment – have the right to refrain from paying union dues spent for activities like political activism, lobbying, and member-only events. Teamster union bosses are further required to provide an independent breakdown of all forced-dues union expenditures. So far, they have failed to adequately fulfill that requirement.

Meanwhile, the employees are also being forced to illegally subsidize the union bosses’ strike fund even though nonmember employees are not eligible under union rules to receive payments from it.

“Teamsters Local 1205 union bosses need to stop this illegal behavior immediately and cease violating the rights of rank-and-file workers,” said Patrick Semmens, legal information director for the National Right to Work Foundation. “Ultimately, the best way to protect the rights of workers in the Empire State is for New York to pass a Right to Work law ending union officials’ power to have workers fired for refusing to pay union dues or fees and making union membership strictly voluntary.”

Worker Advocate: Labor Board’s Discriminatory Rule Change Is Back Door Card Check Provision

Obama Administration bureaucrats changing rules to enact portion of the Card Check bill that was rejected by Congress

Washington, DC (October 5, 2010) – Late last week, the Acting General Counsel of the National Labor Relations Board (NLRB) issued a memorandum to the board’s regional offices establishing new procedures in cases involving union claims that an employee has been fired unlawfully during a union organizing campaign.

The new procedure directs the NLRB’s regional offices to file an injunction in federal court – referred to as a 10(j) injunction for the section it is established under the National Labor Relations Act (NLRA) – requiring the employer keep a union organizer on payroll until the pending case is resolved. Notably, the new rules protect union organizers during aggressive organizing drives but do nothing for employees who are victims of union official misconduct.

Mark Mix, President of the National Right to Work Legal Defense Foundation released the following statement regarding the rule change:

“The NLRB Acting General Counsel’s one-sided dictate creates a double standard against employees who want nothing to do with a union.

“For over 40 years, the National Right to Work Foundation has fought for the rights of hundreds of thousands of workers whose rights have been violated by union officials. Foundation attorneys frequently request 10(j) injunctions in cases in which union bosses are committing unfair labor practices against nonmember workers, but NLRB officials ignore those requests in virtually every case.»

To read Mark Mix’s entire statement, click here.

Washington, DC (October 5, 2010) – Late last week, the Acting General Counsel of the National Labor Relations Board (NLRB) issued a memorandum to the board’s regional offices establishing new procedures in cases involving union claims that an employee has been fired unlawfully during a union organizing campaign.

The new procedure directs the NLRB’s regional offices to file an injunction in federal court – referred to as a 10(j) injunction for the section it is established under the National Labor Relations Act (NLRA) – requiring the employer keep a union organizer on payroll until the pending case is resolved. Notably, the new rules protect union organizers during aggressive organizing drives but do nothing for employees who are victims of union official misconduct.

Mark Mix, President of the National Right to Work Legal Defense Foundation released the following statement regarding the rule change:

“The NLRB Acting General Counsel’s one-sided dictate creates a double standard against employees who want nothing to do with a union.

“For over 40 years, the National Right to Work Foundation has fought for the rights of hundreds of thousands of workers whose rights have been violated by union officials. Foundation attorneys frequently request 10(j) injunctions in cases in which union bosses are committing unfair labor practices against nonmember workers, but NLRB officials ignore those requests in virtually every case.

“The Acting General Counsel’s quick-snap injunctions rule creates a ‘guilty until proven innocent’ standard that will be used by union organizers to pressure employers into helping push employees into union ranks.

“After Big Labor’s Card Check bill has been successfully blocked for two years in Congress, the Obama Administration is now implementing provisions of the card check bill through the executive branch. This new rule is a shameful political payoff to the union bosses who spent over $1 billion in 2008 electing Obama and forced-unionism supporters to Congress.”

Miami, FL (September 30, 2010) – With free legal assistance from the National Right to Work Foundation, a Florida public school teacher successfully challenged a discriminatory policy that prevented nonunion educators from bringing a representative of their choosing to school conferences that can result in disciplinary action.

Shawn Beightol, a veteran chemistry teacher at Michael Krop Senior High School, was told to report to the Miami-Dade County Office of Professional Standards (OPS) to discuss a possible violation of the school’s email policy last October. Although the United Teachers of Dade (UTD) union is the exclusive bargaining agent for the Miami-Dade School District, Beightol refused to associate with the union and is instead a member of the Professional Educators Network of Florida (PENFL), a nonunion teachers association. When Beightol brought a representative from PENFL to the October hearing, school officials refused to allow his advisor to participate, citing a provision in the union’s contract with the district.

Beightol responded by filing charges against union officials and the school district with the help of Foundation attorneys, alleging that this provision unfairly discriminates against nonunion teachers by denying them the opportunity to bring personal representatives to professional hearings. Although UTD members are entitled to union representatives at these conferences, the teachers’ contract – negotiated by union officials with the school district – forbids nonunion representatives from participating. This practice effectively discourages teachers from leaving the UTD or joining a voluntary teacher association by forcing them to join the union for assistance at school conferences.

Florida law explicitly prohibits union officials from causing public employers to discriminate against nonmember employees. Florida’s popular Right to Work Law also guarantees that no employee – public or private – can be coerced into joining a union or paying union dues.

Following an investigation, a hearing officer from the Florida Public Employees Relations Commission concluded that the union’s contract violated state law. The officer recommended that the Commission strike down the union’s discriminatory contract and require UTD officials to post public notices informing teachers of their rights to nonunion representation.

“This policy is nothing more than an underhanded way to weaken workplace protections, including Florida’s popular Right to Work law, that forbid unions from forcing workers to join through coercion or discriminatory workplace practices,” said Patrick Semmens, Legal Information Director for the National Right to Work Foundation. “The Public Employees Relations Commission should take these recommendations to heart and strike down this discriminatory contract immediately.”

Citizen Activist Wins Battle to Inform Keystone State Teachers of Their Constitutional Rights

Teacher union bosses aimed to keep Pennsylvania’s teachers in the dark

Harrisburg, PA (September 30, 2010) – With free legal assistance from the National Right to Work Foundation, citizen activist Simon Campbell has bested teacher union bosses in state court over his right to inform Pennsylvania’s nonmember teachers of their constitutional rights regarding union membership and dues payment.

Several years ago, Simon Campbell of Bucks County founded a group dedicated to the goal of making sure all public school children in the state have the legal right to a strike-free education after his own children were forced out of school in the wake of a debilitating union boss-instigated strike.

More recently, Campbell has requested that public school districts disclose the mailing addresses of teachers who have refrained from formal union membership with the Pennsylvania State Education Association (PSEA) union, but are still forced to pay union dues or fees as a condition of employment because Pennsylvania does not have Right to Work protections for its workers.

Campbell wanted to advise the teachers about their rights under National Right to Work Foundation-won U.S. Supreme Court precedent, such as their right not to subsidize union boss activities other than collective bargaining and contract administration and their right to challenge the union hierarchy’s calculations regarding the amount of forced dues charged to nonmember teachers.

Read the full press release here.

Harrisburg, PA (September 30, 2010) – With free legal assistance from the National Right to Work Foundation, citizen activist Simon Campbell has bested teacher union bosses in state court over his right to inform Pennsylvania’s nonmember teachers of their constitutional rights regarding union membership and dues payment.

Several years ago, Simon Campbell of Bucks County founded a group dedicated to the goal of making sure all public school children in the state have the legal right to a strike-free education after his own children were forced out of school in the wake of a debilitating union boss-instigated strike.

More recently, Campbell has requested that public school districts disclose the mailing addresses of teachers who have refrained from formal union membership with the Pennsylvania State Education Association (PSEA) union, but are still forced to pay union dues or fees as a condition of employment because Pennsylvania does not have Right to Work protections for its workers.

Campbell wanted to advise the teachers about their rights under National Right to Work Foundation-won U.S. Supreme Court precedent, such as their right not to subsidize union boss activities other than collective bargaining and contract administration and their right to challenge the union hierarchy’s calculations regarding the amount of forced dues charged to nonmember teachers.

PSEA union officials sued the Pennsylvania Office of Open Records to block Campbell’s requests. Last week, the Commonwealth Court of Pennsylvania rejected the PSEA union lawyers’ case. Campbell has now again begun the process of obtaining the mailing addresses he sought.

“Plain and simple, all Pennsylvania teachers deserve to know their constitutional rights,” said Patrick Semmens, legal information director for the National Right to Work Foundation. “And many independent-minded teachers would greatly benefit from Simon Campbell’s efforts to inform them of their rights upheld under various Foundation-won Supreme Court precedents.”

“However, the best way to protect the rights of Pennsylvania’s teachers, and all workers in the Keystone State, is for Pennsylvania to pass a Right to Work law making union membership and dues payment strictly voluntary,” added Semmens.

Boca Raton, FL (September 16, 2010) – With free legal assistance from the National Right to Work Foundation, a Mardi Gras Gaming employee has won the right to proceed with a lawsuit aimed at halting a backroom deal in which his employer pledged to assist union organizers and agreed to a coercive card check organizing drive. The United States Court of Appeals for the 11th Circuit overruled a prior District Court decision that held Martin Mulhall lacked standing to sue the Unite Here Local 355 union and Mardi Gras Gaming.

With the help of Foundation attorneys, Mulhall originally filed suit against Unite Here in 2008 for agreeing to support Mardi Gras Gaming’s efforts to obtain a gambling license in return for organizing assistance. In exchange for over one hundred thousand dollars in union dues spent on a gambling ballot initiative and a union guarantee not to picket, boycott, or strike against the facility, Mardi Gras Gaming agreed to assist organizers’ efforts to push workers into union ranks. Company officials promised union operatives they would hand over employees’ personal contact information (including home addresses), grant union officials access to Mardi Gras facilities for the purpose of organizing, and refrain from requesting a federally-supervised secret ballot election to determine whether employees actually wanted to unionize.

However, the Labor Management Relations Act (LMRA) explicitly prohibits employers from giving “any money or other thing of value” to unions. This rule is intended to prevent union operatives from agreeing to undermine workers’ rights in exchange for concessions from management. In his lawsuit, Mulhall argues that the company’s concessions to Unite Here are of substantial monetary value because they made the union organizing process easier and less expensive. The suit also alleges that Unite Here’s willingness to spend over a hundred thousand dollars to lobby on behalf of Mardi Gras Gaming demonstrates just how valuable the agreement is to union officials.

So-called “neutrality agreements” between companies and unions like the one agreed upon by Unite Here operatives and Mardi Gras Gaming give union organizers license to browbeat and intimidate workers into acceding to unionization. Armed with employees’ home addresses and access to company facilities, union officials frequently harass and cajole workers on and off the job until they agree to sign cards that are then counted as “votes” for unionization.

Although the District Court claimed that Mulhall’s suit could not proceed because he was in no danger of “imminent injury,” the Court of Appeals’ decision recognized that the union’s deal could infringe on employees’ rights to free association by forcing them to accept union monopoly bargaining. The ruling remanded the lawsuit to United States District Court for the Southern District of Florida for it to decide Mulhall’s complaint on the merits.

“Unite Here operatives agreed to a corrupt bargain that advanced union boss interests at the expense of individual workers’ rights,” said Patrick Semmens, Legal Information Director for the National Right to Work Foundation. “We’re happy to report that Martin Mulhall’s efforts to challenge this backroom deal will now go forward.”

Philadelphia, PA (September 14, 2010) – After a two year organizing campaign aimed at forcing Hahnemann University Hospital nurses into union ranks, the California Nurses Association (CNA) union abruptly ceased its efforts to unionize the facility last month. The union’s organizing drive was marked by a legally-questionable agreement between CNA operatives and hospital management challenged by nurses represented by the National Right to Work Foundation.

Under a so-called “neutrality agreement” between hospital and union officials, CNA organizers were given preferential access to hospital facilities and Hahnemann supervisors were gagged from truthfully responding to nurses’ inquiries related to unionization. Despite these provisions, the union lost a consent election in July 2009.

During the organizing campaign, Right to Work attorneys helped Hahnemann nurses file legal challenges against the union’s abusive organizing strategy. When union officials threatened Kimberly Hummel with “private arbitration” for opposing the CNA’s presence, the Right to Work Foundation helped her file a complaint against the union’s heavy-handed threats with the National Labor Relations Board (NLRB).

Undeterred by their July 2009 election loss, CNA officials filed a series of election “objections” against the hospital for harassing union organizers. Union operatives also managed to convince hospital officials to agree to disregard the results and hold another unionization election. With the help of Foundation attorneys, another nurse stepped forward in January 2010 to file charges against CNA officials and Hahnemann for staging another unionization drive over the wishes of a majority of hospital employees.

Finally, CNA officials realized they did not have majority support and quietly withdrew their NLRB election petition in late August.

The Hahnemann University Hospital organizing campaign isn’t the first time CNA officials have faced legal challenges for suspicious organizing tactics or walked away when independent-minded nurses fought back. Several Houston-area medical professionals filed unfair labor practice charges against the union for crafting a similar “neutrality agreement” in Texas.

“Despite their best efforts to gag independent-minded nurses and cajole them into union ranks, CNA operatives have finally realized they aren’t wanted at Hahnemann University Hospital,” said Patrick Semmens, Legal Information Director for the National Right to Work Foundation. “Coercive tactics and secret organizing pacts violate workers’ rights, so union officials’ loss is a win for employee freedom.”